mostly negative review

[LeviathansWrath]

as the title says homeworld 3 has now crossed into mostly negative status, now my negative review wasnt directed at bbi, was dirrected at the actions of GBX who interfered with the production of this game, may this be a lesson to them to leave the devs working on a product alone and stay out of it

[Zakalwe]

Player numbers are through the floor, and yet their ENTIRE DLC model is based around the Wargame mode. As God-awful as the story is, the sidelining of the skirmish mode has to be one of the main reasons this has died in a ditch. Has a AAA RTS ever been this badly received?

[Mors Invictus]

Originally posted by Zakalwe:

Has a AAA RTS ever been this badly received?

I guess Dawn of War III comes close. Another single player RTS hampered by a brute force focus on multi-player that wasn't even finished properly at the time of the release (barely any maps and game modes). Meanwhile the campaign's story was so forseeable that it failed to draw me in. Also, playing a campaign that was actually three campaigns for the three factions and had you continuously rotate between factions was just weird.

Edit: How could I forget the legendary Command & Conquer 4 that buried the entire series on a haunted cemetary from which only dreaded spectres in the form mobile games emerge?

[2 Straight Homies Doing the Gay]

Originally posted by Mors Invictus:

Originally posted by Zakalwe:

Has a AAA RTS ever been this badly received?

I guess Dawn of War III comes close. Another single player RTS hampered by a brute force focus on multi-player that wasn't even finished properly at the time of the release (barely any maps and game modes). Meanwhile the campaign's story was so forseeable that it failed to draw me in. Also, playing a campaign that was actually three campaigns for the three factions and had you continuously rotate between factions was just weird.

Edit: How could I forget the legendary Command & Conquer 4 that buried the entire series on a haunted cemetary from which only dreaded spectres in the form mobile games emerge?

dawn of war 3 came to mind mostly because it was also an ip bought by relic, much like hw after the sierra acquisition.

[RoReaver]

Originally posted by 2 Straight Homies Doing the Gay:

dawn of war 3 came to mind mostly because it was also an ip bought by relic, much like hw after the sierra acquisition.

Relic are the creators of Homeworld. BBI is their successors, Sierra bought relic and then keeled over, THQ bought relic then keeled over , GBX bought IPs from relic and then brought in BBI.

[Sentinel-Ghost]

Originally posted by Mors Invictus:

Command & Conquer 4

You must surely be mistaken ... there is NO Command & Conquer 4 ... It doesn't exist ... the franchise ended with Kane's Wrath ... fake news ... never happened ... nope ...

[A Glowing Thing]

Gearbox shouldn't have bought HW. They only wanted to so they could remaster it to make a quick buck. They had no intention of adding to the franchise. Based on the release of HWRM which they botched as well and left 2 guys to undo their mistakes over the next 2 years. BBI got out bidded for HW and has been negotiating with Gearbox ever since to develop for it. BBI's first game was always suppose to be a homeworld game, but they had to make there own IP instead. Until Gearbox finally decided to let them develop for the IP.

Based on the fact that HWRM had random changes made to it that screwed it up and they have done nothing to ensure 1C and 2C function on modern systems; they don't care.

Based on the fact that Gearbox is representing the game on all official channels and not letting BBI represent themselves; They don't care.

Based on the fact that Gearbox pulled rank on executive decisions and took over certain aspects of the game (from one of the 3 guys who created it); They don't care. Seriously though Gearbox sent people with minimal experience to override those with experience and wanted the IP badly.

Based on the fact that Gearbox hasn't admitted failure; They don't care.

Based on the fact that Gearbox's story that is only liked by 5% of the people who liked the game hasn't been recanted and disabled (CGI cutscenes removed, optionally restorable); They don't care.

Based on the fact that Gearbox has publicly apologised for crapping on Homeworld's Legacy; They don't care.

Nothing about Gearbox has anything to due with developing games of this category. Why wouldn't you just kick back and siphon of BBI.

Gearbox already has the money the game earned. They have nothing to lose by doing the right thing; but they won't because they don't care.

[EDIT]: rewrote this sentence cause it ended up not conveying my point properly: "BBI's first game codename "shipbreakers" was always suppose to be a homeworld game, but they had to make it into its own IP until Gearbox finally decided to let them develop for the IP."

[RoReaver]

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

Gearbox shouldn't have bought HW. They only wanted to so they could remaster it to make a quick buck. They had no intention of adding to the franchise. Based on the release of HWRM which they botched as well and left 2 guys to undo their mistakes over the next 2 years. BBI got out bidded for HW and has been negotiating with Gearbox ever since to develop for it. BBI's first game codename "shipbreakers" was always suppose to be a homeworld game, but they had to make it into its own IP until Gearbox finally decided to let them develop for the IP.

Too many half-truths here. Hardware Shipbreakers was its own thing, the only thing in common was "sci fi" "in space" "RTS" "banging soundtrack".

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

Based on the fact that HWRM had random changes made to it that screwed it up and they have done nothing to ensure 1C and 2C function on modern systems; they don't care.

Go watch the Mandelore video on it. They basically grossly exceeded their original goals because they went "well HW1 looks like ass in its own engine even pushed to its limits so lets go for broke"

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

Based on the fact that Gearbox is representing the game on all official channels and not letting BBI represent themselves; They don't care.

BBI has multiple other projects. They're not owned by GBX so this isn't the same sort of situation as, say, Ubisoft pushing a new Deus Ex.

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

Based on the fact that Gearbox pulled rank on executive decisions and took over certain aspects of the game (from one of the 3 guys who created it); They don't care. Seriously though Gearbox sent people with minimal experience to override those with experience and wanted the IP badly.

This is a conspiracy theory cooked up, primarily, by people outside of the fandom. Even HW1 saw a major story shift during development due to faceplanting into technical limitations so to ascribe external malice to what has historically been naked ambition beyond what was possible in a given budget (where you could well go GBX wtf reasonably) is wishful thinking.

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

Based on the fact that Gearbox hasn't admitted failure; They don't care.

Based on the fact that Gearbox's story that is only liked by 5% of the people who liked the game hasn't been recanted and disabled (CGI cutscenes removed, optionally restorable); They don't care.

Because the game isn't a failure, yet.

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

Based on the fact that Gearbox has publicly apologised for crapping on Homeworld's Legacy; They don't care.

Nothing about Gearbox has anything to due with developing games of this category. Why wouldn't you just kick back and siphon of BBI.

Gearbox already has the money the game earned. They have nothing to lose by doing the right thing; but they won't because they don't care.

Expecting "the right thing" from an amoral for profit company... is not the best thing to do. Expecting them to support BBI fixing the game, sans pie in the sky dreams of remaking the campaign, is.

[Богдан]

Exactly where it belongs.
I guess all the banned people wrote their criticism in reviews instead, without giving a second chance.
RIP

[RoReaver]

Originally posted by Богдан:

Exactly where it belongs.
I guess all the banned people wrote their criticism in reviews instead, without giving a second chance.
RIP

Fair few of them don't own the game so it's gonna be in the trashfire of Metacritic.

[A Glowing Thing]

Originally posted by RoReaver:

-You have trouble with your own opinion and the stated position on HW from its developers.

-A youtuber is not a reliable source for anything. Why is it that people need youtubers to tell them what to think. I've read the documentation on it myself.

-non sequitur

-factually incorrect we know several people who are gearbox employees held high roles in development.

-Sure it isn't a release failure monetarily. It is a long term failure.

-Corporations are not thinking entities. They are made up of people who chose to be amoral or moral. This tells us they are immoral people.

[Богдан]

Originally posted by Sentinel-Ghost:

Originally posted by Mors Invictus:

Command & Conquer 4

You must surely be mistaken ... there is NO Command & Conquer 4 ... It doesn't exist ... the franchise ended with Kane's Wrath ... fake news ... never happened ... nope ...

Lol
That feeling when you have it in library, but never launched...

[RoReaver]

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

-You have trouble with your own opinion and the stated position on HW from its developers.

I was around Relicnews forums when BBI started looking, via UberJumper, for people interested in helping out with it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGax_UYXDUI
If you get HW from this you'll be happy to hear Mad Max would be a HW prequel then.

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

-A youtuber is not a reliable source for everything. Why is it that people need youtubers to tell them what to think. I've read the documentation on it myself.

Which one? The one pulled from the game files? Aight, how about you read the HW2 Dustwars scripts next?
Mandelore actually backs up his claims btw, you don't so you rank below him (and I don't agree with his HW3 review, he's far too kind to DoK in it)

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

-factually incorrect we know several people who are gearbox employees held high roles in development.

So you're going to tell me publishers will oversee projects on IPs they own? Okay, prove their interjection.

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

-Sure it isn't a release failure monetarily. It is a long term failure.

Sad that you'd hope that but then again I don't detect much honesty in your reply.

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

-Corporations are not thinking entities. They are made up of people who chose to be amoral or moral. This tells us they are immoral people.

Lets humour you for a second: Which is a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ CEO: One who doesn't care for the bottom line or one who does? The one who does, no matter how kind or noble they may be will look mighty immoral to the downsized employee in a bad economy.

[A Glowing Thing]

Originally posted by RoReaver:

- I was there doesn't mean anything. Its also a logical fallacy.

- There are published interviews with the devs talking about this stuff.

- Of course IP owners oversee their IPs. They own it. They get final say on everything. Interference from the top-down literally happens all the time. Especially in game development.

- non sequitur.

- non sequitur.

Your just being disingenuous now and openly hostile because I won't except your opinion as fact. You know exactly what is meant by what i'm saying. You know that the devs have interviews explaining the HW1 development process (along with the other games). Yet you chose opinion pieces from Youtubers instead ONLY if they they match your opinion.

[RoReaver]

Originally posted by A Glowing Thing:

At this point I think you should learn what a non-sequitur is =)) you claiming something is one isn't an argument against what is said no more than you ignoring the trailer for Hardware Shipbreakers is an argument, claiming I agree with Mandelore (when I don't on HW2 and DoK) nor is your claiming at me holding you to your words by asking for sources to your claims hostility. If that's too difficult then might I suggest you don't tackle with someone who could counter your sources with his own?
I'll wait for those interviews while I point out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivdw86e0k9w even their original trailer shows a retcon that happened just before launch (5 million colonists not 500-600k like in HW 1 1.0). So reality is they've redone their stories in both large and small details a lot. HW3 is the first one to stick to the background canon since HW:C.

[A Glowing Thing]

Originally posted by RoReaver:

The reason what your doing is non sequitur is because the point doesn't serve as an argument if it doesn't actually nullify the original point. Much like in this reply you say they made an adjustment to HW1's story. We're talking about intervention from Gearbox in HW3. Thus its a non-sequitur because story changes to 1 made by the team doesn't mean that Gearbox isn't doing it to HW3.

-I badly phrased the shipbreakers thing. I made it sound like the shipbreakers project was being developed to be like a Homeworld game despite not having the IP. What i meant was that their first project was always supposed to be a Homeworld game because they were going to bid on the IP. I apologise.